Senate rejects earmark moratorium

By
Felicia Sonmez

The Senate on Tuesday rejected a plan that would impose a two-year moratorium on federal earmarking for lawmakers' pet projects, with a handful of Republicans joining with most Democrats to defeat the measure.

The proposal, which would have needed a two-thirds majority to pass, failed by a 39-to-56 margin.

Seven Democrats voted for the ban, including Sens. Mark Udall (Colo.) and Claire McCaskill (Mo.) (who were among the bill's co-sponsors), Evan Bayh (Ind.), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Russ Feingold (Wis.), Bill Nelson (Fla.), and Mark Warner (Va.). McCaskill and Nelson are both up for re-election in 2012 and are likely to face tough battles to hold onto their seats.

Several of those who voted against the ban had previously stated their opposition to the proposal, even though Senate Republicans approved it by voice vote in a closed-door session earlier this month following Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's endorsement of the plan.

Udall, one of the proposal's co-sponsors, expressed disappointment with the vote and vowed to continue to fight earmarking.

"When it comes to budgeting, earmarks are a frustrating -- and ultimately dangerous -- example of the tail wagging the dog," he said in a statement. "Too many lawmakers are so focused on protecting their earmarks, they turn a blind eye to excessive spending bills. Holding government accountable and being good stewards of the public dollar become an afterthought."

Despite the failure of the ban, it's still possible that proponents of the moratorium in the House and Senate may attempt to block any legislation containing earmarks.

How can you expect these same people to control the entire realm of government spending when they can't even vote to suspend their own pet projects for 2 years??? We need another election to get the rest of these people out of office.

Conservatives should take heart-—the anti-earmark bill that was brought up this past March only had 29 senators voting for it. A loss is a loss, but a 10-vote gain in a lame duck session is nothing to sneeze at. And if DeMint and the new conservatives have anything to say about it, zero-based budgeting will soon be making its way into national debate.

Well, the Democrats tried to explain to Republican Voters that things like this (and more) is what's coming from the GOP because the GOP is not capable of telling the truth.

One minute the GOP is taking out ads and giving on-the-spot interviews to TV stations, the next minute the GOP has got its hands stuck WAY out try to grab as much as that "socialist" cash as they can get their hands on.

Will some news organization dig deeper! Programs like National History Day, Council for Economic Education, Center for Civic Education, Close-Up Foundation, and many other civics programs which are administered in every state and every district in the US have been designated earmarks. National History Day is pork? (See definitions of pork and earmarks) Well, ironically, I guess edifying the public to the experiences of democracy is pork. I thought the educated masses could control pork? Wrong. A handful of elitist Senators and Representatives have decided that democratic education would disrupt our check and balance system.

You have to love this "behind closed doors" voting by the House and Senate GOP caucases. What actualy happens is a voting strategy to decide how each group will produce enough votes to either defeat or pass a bill depending on what McConnell and Boehner want.....such BS. Where are the Tea Party zealots?

Trillions in debt and hundreds of billions over budget, yet we can't even manage to nibble around the edges, let alone enact meaningful reductions in spending.

At some point, China will stop lending, and that point is coming soon. Then we will be forced to either print more money (igniting rapid inflation), and/or raise taxes. Actual reductions in spending will take longer to accomplish.

All indications seem to show that this will be a particularly lame duck congress. I'm predicting failure to even extend the tax cuts, for anyone. Won't that be a hoot. Buy your pitch fork and torches now before supplies run out. ;)

Trillions in debt and hundreds of billions over budget, yet we can't even manage to nibble around the edges, let alone enact meaningful reductions in spending.

At some point, China will stop lending, and that point is coming soon. Then we will be forced to either print more money (igniting rapid inflation), and/or raise taxes. Actual reductions in spending will take longer to accomplish.

All indications seem to show that this will be a particularly lame duck congress. I'm predicting failure to even extend the tax cuts, for anyone. Won't that be a hoot. Buy your pitch fork and torches now before supplies run out. ;)

Why is it no surprise that the Senate rejected the moritorium on earmarks? The "kick the can down the road and the heck with the future" way of doing things is still alive and well now that the election is over. What gutless wonders we have supposedly doing the country's business. If they won't pass minor legislation like this to help stem the tide of deficit, how can we believe that they'll take the tougher steps such as ending corporate entitlements and subsidies? It sounds like business as usual with greed ruling all. What a shame.

Earmarks have been such a way of doing business for most the politicians for so many years, it would TAKE A VERY STRONG EFFORT to get rid of them. Our House and Senate aren't strong enough. But it sure sounds good when you're running for office or re-election!

I take issue with those who say that a moratorium on earmarks has "negligible" effect on the deficit. Whenever you start talking about billions of dollars, that is real money. The same with the freeze on the pay of federal workers. Combine the two and you have even more significant amounts of money. And, however one may view the above two measures, either for good or for ill, they would be a start. We must do something to start deficit reduction. We must not stand idly by and continue to watch the decline of our proud and powerful nation. We could also contribute to deficit reduction by cutting off corporate welfare. We always hear griping about "entitlement" programs, but we seldom hear the same people who gripe about that gripe about "corporate entitlements"!

No surprises here. Senate still ruled by Democrat idiots and the Repubs that voted with them are the scum that only pretend to be conservative. Like another post here, not much savings, but might help with the underlying corruption of both the House and Senate. Lisa Murkowski is all scum and corruption, she lives and breathes earmarks.

I take issue with those who say that a moratorium on earmarks has "negligible" effect on the deficit. Whenever you start talking about billions of dollars, that is real money. The same with the freeze on the pay of federal workers. Combine the two and you have even more significant amounts of money. And, however one may view the above two measures, either for good or for ill, they would be a start. We must do something to start deficit reduction. We must not stand idly by and continue to watch the decline of our proud and powerful nation. We could also contribute to deficit reduction by cutting off corporate welfare. We always hear griping about "entitlement" programs, but we seldom hear the same people who gripe about that gripe about "corporate entitlements"!

You have to love this "behind closed doors" voting by the House and Senate GOP caucases. What actualy happens is a voting strategy to decide how each group will produce enough votes to either defeat or pass a bill depending on what McConnell and Boehner want.....such BS. Where are the Tea Party zealots?

@SCVoter- you do know your skewed logic makes you look like a dumb***, right? Your analysis is similar to comparing apples to oranges, both might be fruits but they are diametrically different. WTF? In this instance you are comparing voting on leadership of a group to voting on a moratorium/rule. Exactly how are they the same? One is about choosing a mouthpiece; the other about personal gain. Your comments only show what a self-righteous idiot you are, and how is that any different from some of the republicans you are snarking about?

So Boehner was elected Speaker of the House by a similar voice vote and acclamation by Republicans behind closed doors.

I wonder if Boehner's unanimous election was as wrong as the so-called unanimous Senate Republicans' approval of banning earmarks by voice vote in a closed-door session earlier this month following Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's endorsement of the plan.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.